FilterscapeVA improvement poll

[Urs]

Dear Filterscape Users,

as you might know, I'm currently deep in the process of finishing Filterscape V1.1 (which will also be the final Win version). This - free - update will also include a couple of improvements, mostly derived from feature requests the and experience of 5 months.

Now... a major problem of FilterscapeVA has always been, that the filter parameters are at the end of a long list, and that some hosts such as Live 4 do not let you automate them. So, what I would like to do to improve FilterscapeVA is, I want to take out the parameters of the Arpeggiator Step Control from the list of automatable parameters. This would make the list muuuuch shorter, it would make the Filter parameters accessible for automation and it would give me some space for a couple of planned additions.

But: Changing the list of parameters is equivalent to creating an incompatibility to existing automation data. Hence, if you have already created automation tracks for FilterscapeVA in your songs, you would have to re-assign these tracks to the new parameter structure. Or - for instance if you have automated any Arpeggiator Step Control values - the automation tracks would get lost.

I think it would be consequent to do the proposed change, because you would also get some new stuff that's not yet in, and I can't imagine that automating the Arp Step Control is something very useful at all...

However, I'll let you decide...

Thanks,

Urs

P.S.: Legit Filterscape users only, please!

[Sascha Franck]

OK, probably the easiest way to get both parties happy would be to simply leave 1.0 as is and have 1.1 as a separate install.
That way you'd be able to load your old projects just the way they were.
In case you don't have much automation going on, you could just save the setting in 1.0 and then load 1.1 and the appropriate preset.

Wouldn't that be the best solution?

[wonshu]

Exactly what I thought... but Sascha seems to be faster always...



Cheers
Hans

[sensibubble]

3rding the notion

[Urs]

OK, probably the easiest way to get both parties happy would be to simply leave 1.0 as is and have 1.1 as a separate install.

Hmmm, I think that's not really cool. It would require a new plugin ID and thus everybody who has already made a song would need two versions of VA, which have only little difference. Also, they would not be able to load their own presets into the new version.

I guess that most people have no need for an extra version, and they'd expect the updated version to replace the current in their existing songs. Vice versa, I would guess that a seperate version would introduce more problems than it solves...

Unless there are any really hard cases, i.e. people who build songs with automating 20 or more parameters, I would prefer to go for the clean solution.

Cheers,

Urs

[wonshu]

Personally, I don't have any songs with automation, and yes, two of the same kind can be confusing. But then again, everything in life sort of is.

Hans

[Jemino]

I'm for the clean solution (ok, I'm on Windows and I'm waiting for the final release to use this in my tracks, meaning I'm not going to get automation troubles). Moreover, arpeggiator automation doesn't look like a very useful feature.

[Motion]

I would be happy about the new automation scheme with the ability to automate the filters plus the addition of new features at the expense of the steppers automation.

[Buddah Buddy]

Either way is fine here Urs... I'll leave it in your dextrous hands

[Urs]

To get a picture what I mean by improvisation, here are some hints:

The arpeggiator's step control sequence will get a new modulation parameter (16 sliders) that can be used to modulate cutoff etc. for each step. This has been tested in a synth I made for a magazine cd, and it's a great feature! I would take away automation for gate time, length, number of voices etc., but I would leave the new modulator in.

The filters will get 2 new parameters especially for the 3 new filter types. In particular the new "FilterFM" parameter would be good to have automatable!

The new built-in delay will be at the end of the list anyway, so it won't affect the automation data anyway...

Cheers,

Urs

[mystahr]

For the sake of progress I'd say this to be a little loss compared to the huge gain

[Klemperer]

" space for a couple of planned additions" seems always to be a good thing . So I voted for it, as everybody up to now did. And for all the non-professionals (signed people and so on) getting again to listen to your older songs with some automation in it and doing some settings again can't be a bad thing, no time pressure, so one might even better old stuff. Maybe.
Then nobody says you couldn't finish your songs with the old version, right? That's part of what Sascha meant I think. Finished, install the new that's coming on...
cheers! Never regretted to get that good-sounding Filterscape.

[wrench45us]

well looking at the results there's not much question

as someone who has had to live with developing some software with some design issues, I'd say it's always better to take the pain up front and get it over with than live with limits and quirks for the life of the 'released' product

[Sascha Franck]

Urs, why would applying a new ID result in older presets not being loadable?
I can only compare to Kontakt 1-2. Kontakt 2 will load all my Kontakt 1 presets just fine, without any sonic differences.

However, if you plan to replace the current version, I'd say go for improvements rather than for backwards compatibility. It seesm most people would be happy with that.
I still fail to see the problems a separate version might cause though, I mean, you can just use both... Of course, there's allways the "more installers to take care of" problem - but it has never been a true problem for me anyways.

[manix24]

Dear Filterscape Users,

as you might know, I'm currently deep in the process of finishing Filterscape V1.1 (which will also be the final Win version). This - free - update will also include a couple of improvements, mostly derived from feature requests the and experience of 5 months.

Now... a major problem of FilterscapeVA has always been, that the filter parameters are at the end of a long list, and that some hosts such as Live 4 do not let you automate them. So, what I would like to do to improve FilterscapeVA is, I want to take out the parameters of the Arpeggiator Step Control from the list of automatable parameters. This would make the list muuuuch shorter, it would make the Filter parameters accessible for automation and it would give me some space for a couple of planned additions.

But: Changing the list of parameters is equivalent to creating an incompatibility to existing automation data. Hence, if you have already created automation tracks for FilterscapeVA in your songs, you would have to re-assign these tracks to the new parameter structure. Or - for instance if you have automated any Arpeggiator Step Control values - the automation tracks would get lost.

I think it would be consequent to do the proposed change, because you would also get some new stuff that's not yet in, and I can't imagine that automating the Arp Step Control is something very useful at all...

However, I'll let you decide...

Thanks,

Urs
Yes
P.S.: Legit Filterscape users only, please!